Times and Sunday Times reveal online reader figures
1–10 of 51 posts
Re: Times and Sunday Times reveal online reader figures
#2Much better than I had thought they might be, was hearing 7000 UUs a week bandied around before. (that said, with enough churn 7000 UUs could make 100,000+ total users since live).
that said, I wonder how many are repeat users, how many continue to use the site after their trial subscription is over.
not sure what the figures were for there advertising revenue before, but would be interesting to see whether they are making any more profit, especially since they are making now spending extra resource on online only content.
Re: Times and Sunday Times reveal online reader figures
#3Much better than I had thought they might be, was hearing 7000 UUs a week bandied around before. (that said, with enough churn 7000 UUs could make 100,000+ total users since live). that said, I wonder how many are repeat users, how many continue to use the site after their trial subscription is over. not sure what the figures were for there advertising revenue before, but would be interesting to see whether they are…
This is on the back of an TV ad campaign in the UK, so it would be interesting to see how the numbers sustain.
Re: Times and Sunday Times reveal online reader figures
#4Wonder how many of these people subscribed out of curiosity? What I'm most interested in here is the trend that appears after a couple of quarters.
Re: Times and Sunday Times reveal online reader figures
#5Much better than I had thought they might be, was hearing 7000 UUs a week bandied around before. (that said, with enough churn 7000 UUs could make 100,000+ total users since live). that said, I wonder how many are repeat users, how many continue to use the site after their trial subscription is over. not sure what the figures were for there advertising revenue before, but would be interesting to see whether they are…
This is on the back of an TV ad campaign in the UK, so it would be interesting to see how the numbers sustain.
Yep: £1 for 30 days trial. I think it's very suspicious that such a high number is published in the middle of this campaign. I would rather have them release their figures >1 month after the end of the campaign.
Re: Times and Sunday Times reveal online reader figures
#6To be honest, I'd be a lot happier with my subscription if the website actually worked...At work I'm constantly getting 502'd when I try and read it during lunch. It's fine from at home, but it's still very irritating.
Re: Times and Sunday Times reveal online reader figures
#70.25-1% conversion rate (50-200k vs 20M) is not bad, 100-400X in terms of readers compared to the pure ad vs. subscription model that would be more like 500-5000X in terms of revenue per user depending on their CPM, CPA, CPC rates and subscription pricing structure (assuming the range for all these are somewhere between 1-10 pounds).
Plus they can fire half of their sales team..
Re: Times and Sunday Times reveal online reader figures
#8I'm calling a spade a spade.
100,000 people is pathetic.
Note that this is not subscribers - this is "the total amount of people who have paid in one way or another". 50,000 of those are subscribers, which in PR-speak probably means "people who have subscribed" i.e. not the current amount of subscribers.
With an in-built audience of over a million in circulation, plus a reach that goes far beyond that, an ad campaign AND the novelty value of "new", getting less than 0.5% of your audience to pay for online (it's not even 0.5% - some [most?] of these people have an online subscription because of their print subscription) means either a piss-poor job is being done converting users, or this business model is a dud.
Re: Times and Sunday Times reveal online reader figures
#9I'm calling a spade a spade. 100,000 people is pathetic. Note that this is not subscribers - this is "the total amount of people who have paid in one way or another". 50,000 of those are subscribers, which in PR-speak probably means "people who have subscribed" i.e. not the current amount of subscribers. With an in-built audience of over a million in circulation, plus a reach that goes far beyond that, an ad campaign…
And who in their right mind would pay £1 for a 'one day pass'? This isn't porn, it's just news.
Re: Times and Sunday Times reveal online reader figures
#10I'm calling a spade a spade. 100,000 people is pathetic. Note that this is not subscribers - this is "the total amount of people who have paid in one way or another". 50,000 of those are subscribers, which in PR-speak probably means "people who have subscribed" i.e. not the current amount of subscribers. With an in-built audience of over a million in circulation, plus a reach that goes far beyond that, an ad campaign…
And who in their right mind would pay £1 for a 'one day pass'? This isn't porn, it's just news.
I paid up to $150/day for 1-day passes for some sort of "news".
You have no idea how much it costs to get certain types of "news". Try getting streaming broadcasts for 99% of the conferences that are not computing related. It's nigh near impossible and it costs much.